Particle Structure

[elas]

The transfer of this submission from Classical Physics to Pseudo and Speculative Physics has lead to a collapse in the number of viewers. This makes any attempt to continue developing the CLF model on this forum rather pointless. Therefore I have decided to finish with a summary of the current position although I will, of course; welcome and reply to, any comments by anyone who does manage to find this forum.

 

http://69.5.17.59/clf8.pdf

The last version of the original paper.

1) Explains the concept of the Constant Linear Force model.

2) Proposes an explanation of the Jain and Pseudo-scalar sequences of Hall fractions.

3) Uses Electron Binding Energies to show roll of Hall fractions in atomic structure.

4) Proposes a cause of Hall fractions in atomic structure.

 

Not made clear in the above paper is that the CLF model regards atomic structure as a formation of proton-electron mesons with the proton stabilized in the atomic nucleus by the presence of neutrons. This is a vacuum structure; the CLF model does not require any other force than vacuum force. That is to mean that other forces are different states of the vacuum force (see http://69.5.17.59/erp2.pdf) just as all particles are different states of a single fundamental particle.

 

 

http://69.5.17.59/erp2.pdf

This paper compares the CLF model with a diagram taken from ‘The Enigmatic Electron’ by Malcolm H. Macgregor and introduces the proposal that within the fundamental particle force operates on a logarithmic scale.

 

http://69.5.17.59/Brynstrctr.pdf

This paper shows that the introduction of linear force into a table published by Klabucar et al. it shows that the difference between strange particles is a fixed quantity of linear force. This indicates that linear force can be used to produce a constant of quanta.

 

http://69.5.17.59/brynhf.pdf

Hall fractions of baryon structure – full table.

 

http://69.5.17.59/lnr E.pdf

This paper shows how the rest energy of a particle can be derived from the internal quantities of elementary particles using the CLF model.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Requiem to a thought.

 

Welcome to the Silence of this blank page, where once great thoughts marched; only to be slaughtered by mathematicians who multiply light by light and deal in an infinity of probabilities. There was once one amongst them strong enough to declare that “God does not play dice” but traitors declared that “the dice is God” and lead them away from the land of true science into the land of hypothesis where all predictions come true, no one knows why.

Try not to return, for the philosophers will heap scorn upon you and pelt you with their magic formulas that, for all their predictive magic, have no beauty that can be expressed in words; and if all else fails they will banish you, as they have banished me; to the silence of these blank pages.

But come all you seekers of truth, to this dark hole, in the certainty that all light is temporary and those who worship at the alter of light, will one day see the light vanish. But on these blank pages lies the truth which is that it is in this dark nothingness that God creates a wondrous symphony, full of beauty and order, it is called Universe. For a while its awesome melodies fill this pinprick in infinity.

When its last echoes fade away and the great void is again still, it is in this dark nothingness that God rests; there is no dice, no magic, only the wondrous silence of this blank page.

elas

[Riogho]

By Vacuum force are you talking the Casimir affect?

[elas]

By Vacuum force are you talking the Casimir affect?

 

I have not revisited this thread since I wrote 'Requiem to a Thought' but by coincidence, as a direct result of a recent thread on the Casimir effect see:

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=38839

 

here I am again researching old papers, preparing a reply to 'swansont'.

 

At the time of your question I could not have given a positive reply but, as a result of my work on a structural Table of Elements I can say yes I am talking about the Casimir effect. The key to understanding the Casimir force is in realizing that the Casimir effect occurs only where there are no gravitons; that is to say the Casimir effect occurs only in gaps and pits ('wells' in some professionally writings) that are to small for gravitons to enter in their entirety. In the original Casimir experiment using plates, gravitons act as plugs around the edges of the plates allowing only photonic matter into the gap between the plates. The photonic matter carries the observed waves.

In atomic structure the gaps between electrons of each shell contain Casimir wells whose volume determines the nature of the atomic element. These wells are plug by the addition of more electrons until the shell thickness is so thin that 2 electrons fill the shell.

Remember that unlike other forces; the strong force increases with distance so the outer electron shell is subject to the greatest strong force originating from the nucleus. Just imagine what would happen if gravity did the same!.

Not only does a each part of each electron fill a Casimir gap, but, it (the electron) is also directly connected to a nuclear proton thereby forming a meson. This double bonding is what makes atoms tough cookies; and the cause of the complete structure can be explained using only the effect of vacuum force on different densities of matter giving rise to the first model of atomic structure that obeys the Law of Economy.

Quantum theory provides the mathematics that allows the theorist to go from A to B without understand the 'cause' (QT is non-causal); classical physics explain the 'cause' with only the minimum of additional maths.

Edited March 3, 2009 by elas

[Sha31]

The existence of a magnetic force is well-established. You need a very compelling reason to discard it.

 

I have discarded nothing; in showing that atomic structure can be explained without the introduction of magnetic force I am obeying the Law of Economy.

 

Can you describe hydrogen atom and bonding of 2xH into H2 molecule more closely?

 

Do electrons in your theory follow classical trajectories? Do you have any equations to describe what are electrons and protons actually doing, who is attracting who with what force, what is their velocity and such?

[elas]

Can you describe hydrogen atom and bonding of 2xH into H2 molecule more closely?

 

Probably not, but I did a Table on bonding which I will try and find.

 

Do electrons in your theory follow classical trajectories? Do you have any equations to describe what are electrons and protons actually doing, who is attracting who with what force, what is their velocity and such?

 

Quantum theory gives us the mathematics of actions, I cannot make any improvement on those, but QT does not tell us how or why. My aim is to explain particle structure so that the particle described can be used to explain how or why. QT is highly complex; structure however, is as Newton wrote “a thing of great simplicity” and the pursuit of simplicity is just about within the scope of my abilities!

[Sha31]

Can you describe hydrogen atom and bonding of 2xH into H2 molecule more closely?

 

Probably not' date=' but I did a Table on bonding which I will try and find.

[/quote']

 

What is that 'Table on bonding' talking about? What can it tell us?

 

 

Quantum theory gives us the mathematics of actions' date=' I cannot make any improvement on those, but QT does not tell us [i']how[/i] or why. My aim is to explain particle structure so that the particle described can be used to explain how or why.

 

I'm asking you how and why. How particle structure dictates motion of particles? Why electrons repel?

[elas]

The question of bonding is one I did not intend to deal with, but the table mentioned might help; if I can find it.

 

e plus p stay together because the linear forces of elasticity of matter and vacuum are equal creating a balanced composite particle field.

 

e plus e and p plus p do not produce a balanced composite field (they have unequal linear force and anti-force) therefore they are free to rebound or be 'repulsed' by the difference in force, the force between the like particles being different to the external force arising from the presence of external particles (Neuton's corpuscular universe).

 

The terms 'attract' and 'repulse' are misleading, particle movement is determined by differences in density of particles (partial vacuum fields); there is no need to continue with the use of ill defined force names (i.e. force names that can only be defined by their action and not by the cause of the action). The pursuit of simplicity is acheived by strict adherence to the Law of Economy.

Edited December 18, 2009 by elas

[elas]

No, that's not my argument at all. I noted, as did Ben, that the classical electron radius is not the physical size of the electron.

 

I find that the classical electron radius is listed in the Particle Data Group Handbook on p217 and used in equations such as shown on p230 see:

 

http://pdg.lbl.gov/2009/download/rpp-2008-booklet.pdf